Re: [Gretl-devel] Responses to Sven, I
On 06/27/2011 05:35 PM, Allin Cottrell wrote:
Sven (1):
I have the following (example) function which specifies a "null" default
for an optional list argument:
function scalar defaultnullcheck(const list mylist[null])
print "nothing happening"
end function
If I package that function and call it in the GUI I don't get the "null"
default inserted in the place for the mylist argument. Instead another
list (probably the first that was created in the session) is inserted
there. I propose to insert the "null" keyword instead.
Allin: OK, done in CVS.
Confirmed, thanks.
Sven (2):
'string' and 'bundle' are not syntax-colored (nor "eval")
Allin: should now be OK in CVS.
confirmed
Sven (3):
When I specify a function parameter with min/max and default values like
this:
'int p[1::2]',
on saving gretl seems to insert a trailing colon:
'int p[1::2:]'
This doesn't seem to do any harm (which is also strange, isn't it?), but
is it intended?
Allin: This is not really a problem: the last colon demarcates the
(possibly absent) "step" value. But it's maybe inelegant, and is
now removed in CVS.
I don't know anything about the "step" value in this context, it
doesn't
seem to be in the manual. If there is an absent thing at the end --which
I wasn't aware of-- I actually think the trailing colon is helpful and
the previous behavior might be restored.
Sven (4):
So I've noticed that when I use Alt+Tab to cycle through the open
windows (on Ubuntu, haven't tried windows) the main gretl window and any
gretl script windows are marked with the gretl logo/icon, but not the
function package list, or the function package call window. This makes
it a little difficult to quickly switch to them.
Allin: this should be fixed in CVS.
confirmed
Sven (5):
Is it intended that the following doesn't work:
...
Allin: I would say it's reasonable that the above doesn't work:
there's nothing to "evaluate" here, since the function doesn't
return anything. Just say "check()".
Ok, seems I slightly misunderstood the purpose of 'eval'.
Sven (6):
...
But I get an error message:
"Unrecognized sample command
*** error in function samplecheck"
Allin: The problem here is not specific to loops, it's specific
to the use of "-p", which is a valid short-form option for the
"smpl" command. Fix in CVS: insist on long-form options for smpl
(i.e. don't interpret "-p" as an option flag).
Ah good catch. As I confessed at the conference, I wasn't really aware
of the short-form options. Would it be possible to have them
syntax-colored, too? Apart from general readability it would have
indicated the problem here in this case.
And also, what does 'smpl -p' mean, as there is no option starting with p?
Oh, and just a gentle reminder that this is mildly
backwards-incompatible and should go on the respective log :-)
thanks,
sven